web analytics
December 1, 2015 / 19 Kislev, 5776
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘secretary of state’

Kerry ‘Knows’ ObamaDeal Will Make the Middle East a Safer Place

Monday, August 3rd, 2015

Anyone who is sure about anything in the Middle East is talking through his hat, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry sports the most porous hat in the world.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has reassured the Gulf States he “knows” that the nuclear agreement with Iran will make the world a better place, and the Obama administration is being pressed to “prove” it on the terms of the Sunni oil-rich kingdoms.

They want billions of dollars in weapons, and Qatar dedicated much of Kerry’s visit to insist that the United States force Israel out of half of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

He began his Middle East tour, sans Israel, with talks in Egypt before moving on to Qatar. Despite White House spins to the contrary, the Gulf States are miserably unhappy with the agreement and are keeping their opposition under the surface while exploiting the opportunity to feed the military-industrial complex and shrink Israel.

Kerry said in Egypt:

There can be absolutely no question that if the Vienna plan is fully implemented, it will make Egypt and all the countries of this region safer than they otherwise would be or were.

The United States and Egypt recognize that Iran is engaged in destabilizing activities in the region — and that is why it is so important to ensure that Iran’s nuclear program remains wholly peaceful.

How does the man know that the deal will make the Middle East safer?

Because he says so, and that’s that.

There have been few people who ever have been able to predict what will happen in the Middle East. Condoleezza Rice, who was Secretary of State in the Bush administration, was “sure” that her move to force democratic elections on the Palestinian Authority would result in a resounding victory for Mahmoud Abbas.

She was one of the few who were shocked that Hamas won the elections.

Kerry’s predecessor Hillary Clinton, who might prove that President Barack Obama really is not the worst president possible, cheered Bashar al-Assad as a “reformer” weeks after the Arab Spring protests broke out in Syria.

President Obama was sure that getting rid of Hosni Mubarak, whose autocratic and undemocratic rule kept Egypt stable, would usher in a new wave of democracy.

He was so sure that he endorsed the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist party, which won the elections. One year later, President Obama enthusiastically backed the removal of Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi for a more “democratic regime” headed by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who is Mubarak Number 3.

And now Mr. Kerry is sure that the ObamaDeal the best thing for the Middle East ever since Islam.

E-Mails Show Clinton without a Clue on How to Relate to Israel

Sunday, August 2nd, 2015

Hillary Clinton’s e-mails expose what President Barack Obama has tried to hide – a  person with absolutely no values or principles except to be politically correct.

The U.S. State Dept. on Friday released more of her hidden e-mails, and they show her as being uncertain and without a clue on relations with Israel.

She desperately sought advice in 2009 when she received advanced notice that the U.N.-sanctioned Goldstone Report thoroughly condemned Israel for alleged war crimes in Operation Cast Lead against Hamas missile attacks on Israel in late 2008 and early 2009. The voluminous report  was based on information that its author Richard  Goldstone later found out to be biased and led him to retract most of his criticism.

His original conclusions were devastating, and Clinton’s e-mails reveal she did not know what to think, according to the correspondence published by Vice News.

Clinton wrote her adviser Jack Sullivan:

What’s the guidance on what I should say? Mitchell just reported to me how strongly the Israelis feel that the POTUS and I speak out forcefully about it now.

And they said if there’s a vote in the UNGA that’s the end of the peace process. What do you know?

Mitchell at my request is calling [then-White House Chief of Staff] Rahm [Emanuel] and [US Ambassador to Israel] Dan Shapiro to report and be sure POTUS knows before he tapes shows today.

Clinton also showed no confidence about how to deal with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on the issue of building for Jews in “settlements” in Judea and Samaria.

Sandy Berger, who was her adviser as well her husband’s when he was president, e-mailed her:

The objective is to try shift [sic] the fulcrum of our current relationships with Bibi from settlements – where he thinks he has the upper hand – to ground where there is greater understanding in Israel of the American position and where we can make him uneasy about incurring our displeasure

Two weeks after e-mailing Sullivan on the Goldstone Report, Clinton e-mailed Berger, apparently referring to Netanyahu’s’ agreement to freeze construction:

Let me know how you think today played.

She did not ask for information. She did not ask for the meaning of the Goldstone Report or the freeze.  All she was worried about was how to react and how to play the game.

President Barack Obama does the same, but Clinton has been caught.

Clinton is campaigning as the greatest friend of Israel since God, Whom she has not yet e-mailed for advice.


Kerry Skips over Israel in Middle East Trip

Tuesday, July 28th, 2015

When President Barack Obama says Israel his back, does he mean he is turning his back?

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is conveniently skipping over America’s closest ally this week during a trip that will take him to neighboring Egypt as well as Egypt, Qatar, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam.

The reason or skipping over Israel is obvious: The Obama administration’s single-minded objective right now is to make sure Congress does not reject “ObamaDeal” with a veto-proof majority.

President Obama’s declaration that he wants an “honest discussion” on the controversial agreement with Iran has its limits. After Kerry was told by Republican senators last week that he was “fleeced” and “bamboozled” by Iran, he does not want to walk into lion’s den.

But the State Dept., of course, has a different version of why Kerry is not stopping over Israel.

Spokesman John Kirby explained to nosy reporters at Monday’s daily press briefing:

It’s just not part of the parameters for this trip. It’s not – it wasn’t a deliberate decision not to go. There’s an awful lot to cover in eight days, as you can see. It’s literally – it’s an around-the-world trip.

He has been in touch with Prime Minister Netanyahu many, many times over the last several weeks in terms of discussing the deal and the parameters of it. So it’s not as if we aren’t in constant communication with Israeli counterparts about this.

The last call that I see to the Prime Minister took place on Thursday the 16th of July.

A journalist pointed out that was more than week ago, bur Kirby maintained, “Yeah, but that’s not that long ago.”

“Constant communication” is subjective.

The truth is that Kerry and Prime Minister Netanyahu do not have much to talk about. They can argue until they are blue in the face, but it is not going to get anyone anywhere, even though it would be a boon for the media.

Kerry may not find Egypt much friendlier, but at least he can count on Cairo not enabling the freedom of expression and speech that he doesn’t like in Israel, unless it is in his favor.

He will be in Cairo on Sunday for a session of the U.S.-Egypt Strategic Dialogue, a forum that “reaffirms the United States’ longstanding and enduring partnership with Egypt,” in the words of the State Dept.

That is the same phrase the United States uses for all of its wonderful friends, such as Israel.

On Monday, Kerry will meet with Gulf States officials in Doha, where Saudi Arabia will take the lead to lecture him in private what Netanyahu says in public: The deal with Iran is suicidal, and the war on the Islamic State (ISIS) needs to be more aggressive.

Did Kerry Lie About ‘Anytime Anywhere?’

Wednesday, July 22nd, 2015

(JNi.media) Did Secretary of State John Kerry lie when he told the press and a number of legislators that the coming Iran nuclear deal involved “Anytime Anywhere” inspections? Did he offer this version of the truth while knowing too well the most the Iranians were going to accept was a 24-day warning before an inspection could be carried out?

Some Congressional leaders have told Bloomberg that they had been under the impression that Kerry was pressing Iran to allow UN inspectors access “anytime, anywhere” to sites suspected of nuclear activity.

Kerry denies it. When John Dickerson, host of Face The Nation asked him point blank on Sunday: “What happened, Mr. Secretary, with anytime, anywhere?” Kerry answered: “Never — this is a term that honestly I never heard in the four years that we were negotiating. It was not on the table.”

Kerry proceeded to lecture that “there’s no such thing in arms control as anytime, anywhere. There isn’t any nation in the world, none, that has an anytime, anywhere. And the truth is, what we always were negotiating was an end to the interminable delays that people had previously [imposed].”

In other words, in Kerry’s view, the 3-week span between requesting access to a facility and the inspectors being let in, is a victory of sorts. There will be no more delays — after those 3 week notices. Now “we have a finite time period. That’s never happened before. And we have one nation’s ability to take this to the Security Council to enforce it. That is unique. And we think it was a huge accomplishment to be able to get this finite period,” Kerry insisted.

Dickerson asked, “Just to check the record here, Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser, said in April “you will have anywhere, anytime, 24-7 access.”

Kerry responded: “Well, we do, but — we have access to Fordow, access to Natanz, access to these places.”

“I don’t know if he was referring everywhere, but an access resolution of an IAEA challenge for a suspected facility that’s undeclared, this is a breakthrough agreement which has a finite period that our intel community, and our scientists — and here is one of the foremost nuclear scientists in the country telling us that that is — there is no way for them to hide that material or do away in 24 days,” Kerry repeated.

Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Senator Bob Corker told Bloomberg: “I could have sworn that he had said that, but I know it’s been a topic of discussion for a long, long time.”

Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Senator Richard Burr told Bloomberg: “I think I heard Secretary Kerry use that term once.”

“Any lack of access, delay in time, or lack of being able to verify should be a concern to us,” Burr added.

Congresswoman Janice Hahn (D-Ca) holds that the deal should assure “anytime, anywhere” inspections.

Congressman Alan Lowenthal (D-Ca) told the House in June: “The goal of the ongoing P5+1 negotiations is to guarantee that Iran never develops a nuclear weapon. As Congress assesses the final deal, I am going to draw upon a recent publication which is entitled, ‘Negotiations with Iran: Five Requirements for a Good Deal,’ which details the following five components: one, mechanisms supporting strong verification, including anytime, anywhere inspections of all Iranian nuclear and military facilities…”

Back in April, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, a nuclear physicist who negotiated the technical details of a framework nuclear accord, told Bloomberg: “We expect to have anywhere, anytime access.”

On Sunday, Dickerson asked Prime Minister Netanyahu: “President Obama once said that he had Israel’s back. Do you think that he’s betrayed you here with this deal?”

Kerry’s Dramatic Statement: ‘No Agreement Yet’

Sunday, July 5th, 2015


A senior U.S. official, code for the State Dept., put the press on red alert around 17:00 (10 a.m. EDT) with a statement that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was to make an announcement half an hour later from Vienna, where he and the other P5+1 powers are trying to hammer out an agreement with Iran on is nuclear program.

More than 20 minutes past the announced time, with journalists waiting with bated breath in Vienna, where temperatures are nearly 100 degrees, Kerry made this breathtaking statement:

Progress has been made. No, an agreement is not yet there. We are not there yet. We have difficult issues still to resolve.

Tweets direct from Vienna added more of the same old clichés:

Prepared to walk away if they can’t get a deal that satisfies.

Pushing for deal by July 7 deadline

We are not yet where we need to be….this negotiation could go either way

We want a good agreement…We’re not going to shave, anywhere, at the margins, just to get an agreement.

We are closer than we have ever been.

We’re not going to negotiate in the press.

Right now we’re aiming to finish this in the time frame we’ve set out.

I think there’s a lot of speculation. It’s now time to see whether we are able to close the agreement.

Hillary Clinton Says She Will Be Better Friend than Obama to Israel

Saturday, July 4th, 2015

Hillary Clinton has promised that Israel will have her as a better friend than President Barack Obama if she is elected President next year.

She also exclaimed that Iran poses an “existential threat” to Israel, as if any serious presidential contender thinks otherwise.

While strongly supporting attempts for a “good” deal with Iran, she is trying to reassure wealthy Jews that they can safely contribute to her campaign coffers and can sleep safely last night knowing that she will be good for Israel, even if Israelis spend the night running to bomb shelters.

That is what President Obama also said in 2008. That is what every presidential candidate says, but American Jews lover to hear because they want to believe it.

When it comes to the deal being negotiated between the P5+1 and Iran, Clinton is playing both sides of the fence, and it is not clear where she stands. Politico interviewed 10 donors and fundraisers and reported:

Donors who see a deal as important to world peace have come away thinking that Clinton shares their perspective, but so, too, do donors who oppose any prospective agreement as compromising Israeli security.

Clinton is no different from Obama and every other politician. “No deal is better than a bad deal,” she said, but what is a bad deal? Is it possible to make any deal with Iran can call it “good?”

Since no one yet knows if a deal with Iran will be reached and if so, what it will contain, Clinton can safely hedge her bets.

At stake is $2 billion that Clinton’s aides hope to raise for her campaign and super PACs.

in the meantime, she is boasting that her personality and experience as Secretary of State are guarantees for Americans Jews that she will be a lot friendlier than Obama when it comes to relations with Israel.

She started name-dropping, referring to former Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren as “Michael” whom she said she knows well.

The penchant for American Jews to buy assurances that the American-Israeli relation will be just fine and dandy was summed up by Politico’s report on a fundraiser last month at the home of Democratic party donor Jay Jacobs. An Orthodox rabbi asked Clinton about threats to Israel, and Jacobs told Politico:

She did stress in no uncertain terms her full and fervent support of the state of Israel and the defense of the state of Israel. And the people in the audience who heard it seemed to be comfortable with her answer.

Good grief!

What did the rabbi think she would say? Did he really believe that Clinton would say, “Well, you know all the talk about threats to Israel is just talk to get more money from the military-industrial complex. Israel can fend for itself. Let’s talk about the economy and immigration.”

Of course she fervently supports Israel. That is what J Street also says.

At least she was honest when she stated, “I’m going to do what’s in the best interest of the U.S.”

That is what any president of the United States should do. He or she should be “pro-American” and not “pro-Israel.”

The kicker is that being pro-Israel usually is the best thing for the United States, even if presidents can’t admit it.

Kerry Might Celebrate 4th of July by Talking with Iran on Deal

Sunday, June 28th, 2015

A senior U.S. official said Sunday it is prepared to extend talks with Iran beyond the June 30 deadline, which is a surprise to no one.

This is why The JewishPress.com has been laying low on the negotiations between the P5+1 and the Islamic Republic.
It was clear as the nose on U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s face that “deadline” in the Persian language means “maybe tomorrow.”

Talks have been going on for three years, and the “final” deadline of last November has been extended, as was every other deadline before and after.

President Barack Obama knows that Iran is playing games. Iran knows that Obama knows, and Obama knows that Iran knows… and so on and so forth.

The problem is that the game is over a nuclear weapon, which under Iran’s definition of peaceful purposes would be used as a threat to annihilate Israel and rid the world of Zionism, which is responsible for horrors such as the mobile phone, instant messaging, WAZE, drugs against Muscular Sclerosis, USB, Rummikub, the model for desalination, solar energy, drones, computer chips, breast tumor imaging and Natalie Portman.

We will back with more news around July 2 or maybe the 4th of July, when Iran can force Kerry to celebrate American Independence Day by sweating over a bad deal.

As for now, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif is playing out the script and returning to Tehran tonight. He will back on Monday for the next act.

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini made one of the most unimportant comments of the year, stating that a final deal can be achieved if both show “strong political will.”

She added, “We stick to the foreseen timetable. If a few days more are needed, we can take them.”

Some say “a few is eight,” and even more. That would push talks dangerously close to mid-July and might muck up President Barack Obama’s rumored invitation to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at that time.

If the invitation is valid, it would set the stage for President Obama to snicker at Prime Minister Netanyahu over a deal that Israel would rather go the way of the Titanic, or brag how he backs Israel so much that he did not agree to a lousy deals that he knows Congress won’t approve.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/kerry-might-celebrate-4th-of-july-by-talking-with-iran-on-deal/2015/06/28/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: